Christians! Now which Mosaic Laws are still in force for you?

[oldbadger]

See: cotton kills

Why does Cotton Kill? - Section Hikers Backpacking Blog

And to think I've been wearing cotton underpants for seven decades. That answers a lot of questions now, though.

 

[oldbadger]

Unlike Judaism, Christianity does not guide its adherents via explicit laws but by general principles. Though a lot of more explicit practices have grown up, in many branches of Christendom, derived by priests, rulers and others from these principles.

A bit like the Islamic Hadiths, maybe?
Unfortunately the Christian extremists seem to have fed wholly on the rants of bigoted pastors and so forth. Or am I wrong/

 

[Deeje]

OK. So.... do you take notice of all of these commands, or just the one in Acts?

Do you follow any OT laws, the Mosaic Laws?

If Jesus fulfilled the Law, then he has put it behind him and moved us forward into the "new covenant". When he was asked what the greatest commandment in the Law was.....
"He said to him: “‘You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’ 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this: ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets.”

His last statement says it all...the whole of the Law was based on these two, so theoretically it was not possible to break one of those two without breaking any of the others. The principles still apply because the spirit of the law never went away.

 

[oldbadger]

What was reiterated by Jesus? He upheld God's standards of morality, especially with regard to marriage and divorce. The sacrificial laws were fulfilled in him, and God had given Israel every opportunity to separate themselves from a religious system that had lost its way. (Mayhem 23)

Since Gentiles were not required to convert to Judaism, but to become disciples of Jesus Christ, through faith and confirmed by baptism, various facets of the law that applied to Israel were not incumbent on them. (No Sabbath, no food prohibition, (apart from consumption of blood) and no clothing rules apart from God's standards of modesty. Not following extreme worldly fashion trends)

It's just a common sense evaluation of what Jesus taught...not what a law code, instituted under an old covenant, dictated.

The new covenant was more concerned with why a person should obey the principles of the law that Jesus promoted, rather than strict adherence to laws with little thought as to why they were given.

Law by Common Sense?
Then we are lost, or most of us.

But you mention that there is no law about food consumption apart from blood. Who told you that? Where did you get that rule of life?

Over many years JWs have quoted many many Mosaic Laws in my hearing, but you mention just that one?

How do you know which ones to follow and which ones to disguard?

 

[74x12]

OK..... So..... how many Christian business folks have a one-year paid leave (or leave of absence) scheme for their employee brides and/or grooms? If not, why not?

I think you miss the point here. It doesn't say don't work for a year. It says don't go to war; because you could die and then you won't be able to enjoy your new wife's company. Also she will be a widow.

 

[oldbadger]

If Jesus fulfilled the Law, then he has put it behind him and moved us forward into the "new covenant". When he was asked what the greatest commandment in the Law was.....
"He said to him: “‘You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’ 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this: ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets.”

His last statement says it all...the whole of the Law was based on these two, so theoretically it was not possible to break one of those two without breaking any of the others. The principles still apply because the spirit of the law never went away.

Are you saying that the Mosaic Laws are not necessary now? If they are, which ones?

 

[74x12]

And I cannot tie any of it down! Like willow-the-wisps some Christians will pick up and drop Mosaic Laws at whim (it seems) whilst totally disregarding the ones that others have greatest respect for.
So...... please...... Can you help with this?

That's just the thing isn't it? But according to my beliefs we are not under the Law at all. However, that doesn't mean all the Law is therefore invalid and we can disobey it. It just so happens many of those laws are still valid because they're still morally true.

Many of the laws however especially the ritual ones like keeping feast days etc. Are no longer necessary because they have nothing to do with morality. They were rituals just to teach people about spiritual truths.

 

[oldbadger]

I think you miss the point here. It doesn't say don't work for a year. It says don't go to war; because you could die and then you won't be able to enjoy your new wife's company. Also she will be a widow.

No..... although I saw the bit about war, I saw much more than you. Here it is again:-

Deut {24:5} When a man hath taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war, neither shall he be charged with any business:[but] he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken.

No..... you picked out the 'war' bit and disguarded the 'business' bit. Do you do that a lot with the Laws?

 

[74x12]

No..... although I saw the bit about war, I saw much more than you. Here it is again:-

Deut {24:5} When a man hath taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war, neither shall he be charged with any business:[but] he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken.

No..... you picked out the 'war' bit and disguarded the 'business' bit. Do you do that a lot with the Laws?

Probably business meant as in travelling. Good point though.

 

[74x12]

Also traveling for business back then was dangerous. Could never return home. Same thing as war different reason.

 

[shmogie]

Thanks for the post.
OK, so I won't need to take notice of any OT laws quoted by Christians, is that right?

No, you are incorrect. It depends upon what verse is quoted and why.

I could quote from the book of Job showing God is in total control of the universe, that hasn't changed.

I could quote the dietary laws given to the wandering tribe of Israel in an alien land, where concern about disease from wild animals. Certain animals were restricted as food for these health reasons.

2,000 years later, where the food supply is primarily farmed, and raised properly, Christ declared all food clean.

So, as I said, it depends upon the verses and their context.

As to the law, keep in mind that many OT laws are reiterated, or modified and incorporated in the law of Christ.

 

[Darkforbid]

No, you are incorrect. It depends upon what verse is quoted and why.

I could quote from the book of Job showing God is in total control of the universe, that hasn't changed.

I could quote the dietary laws given to the wandering tribe of Israel in an alien land, where concern about disease from wild animals. Certain animals were restricted as food for these health reasons.

2,000 years later, where the food supply is primarily farmed, and raised properly, Christ declared all food clean.

So, as I said, it depends upon the verses and their context.

As to the law, keep in mind that many OT laws are reiterated, or modified and incorporated in the law of Christ.

Job is prose, buddy

 

[shmogie]

Job is prose, buddy

So you think, buddy.

 

[Darkforbid]

So you think, buddy.

It know to be, it's a story about the nature of good and evil

It's from Jewish writings (Ketuvim)

It has been widely praised for its literary qualities, with Alfred Lord Tennyson calling it "the greatest poem of ancient and modern times"

 

[Deeje]

Law by Common Sense?
Then we are lost, or most of us.

Yes, I've always said that we should have a national funeral for it....or even an international day of lamentation...

But you mention that there is no law about food consumption apart from blood. Who told you that? Where did you get that rule of life?

In the scripture I quoted earlier, it was really about the issue of circumcision. The Jewish Christians were wanting the Gentile Christians to conform to Jewish law. But the governing body of older men, seeing that a huge conflict was brewing took the matter to Jehovah in prayer. Once a decision had been made by the power of the holy spirit, a letter was sent then to all the congregations detailing their decision....

"For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you except these necessary things: 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”

Do you see what was considered "necessary"? Only a few things that pertained to Gentiles. There was no Sabbath, no circumcision, no laws that may have been burdensome to those not raised with them....just avoiding the things sacrificed to idols, (which included meat not properly bled) the Law on blood (which included the strangled animals which under the law had to be properly bled) and sexual immorality. If they carefully kept themselves from those things whilst obeying all the other teachings of the Christ, then they would prosper (spiritually speaking).

Over many years JWs have quoted many many Mosaic Laws in my hearing, but you mention just that one?

The Mosaic Law contained many principles which still apply. But the law on blood is a law that was never outdated. It was repeated down through the ages from Noah, to Israel, until Jesus, and carrided on by his disciples.

How do you know which ones to follow and which ones to disguard?

The old law involved no one exercising their conscience...there was just the law and committing it led to a penalty.....simple. But obedience came as a result of fear of punishment, not because of love for God and the exercise of conscience. The Law of Love, under the New Covenant, dealt more with a person's motives. Actions were now not dictated by law and punishment, but more so on love for God and a fear of displeasing him. Conscience was to be our moral compass.

The Christian Congregation could have been a haven of peace if everyone simply followed the Law of Love. Doing to their neighbors what they would like others to do for them....but humans tend to complicate even simple things. It was not complicated unless someone wanted to upset the apple cart and justify behavior that caused trouble for others.

 

[shmogie]

What would he be basing his diatribes on? He was an orthodox Jew until his "conversion".



OK, let's say you're right. Then how do you explain the "clobber passages"? Why those and no others?

In my theological training, I never heard of a "clobber passage".

What do you mean?

 

[Jainarayan]

In my theological training, I never heard of a "clobber passage".

What do you mean?

https://ecinc.org/clobber-passages/

 

[oldbadger]

On the contrary, Christ's second commandment handles that - while avoiding the tedious and questionable territorial claims, with which the OT is replete.

But I agree the language and poetic expression is much to be admired, as well as the sentiments. Nobody in this thread is saying the OT is irrelevant to the faith, but your question was very specific.

OK, are you saying that the OT is relevant to Christianity but that it does not and cannot drive Christian rules, laws or morals?

Some Christians quote the OT all the time at me, especially the more extreme ones. And where Christians on this thread have told me that Love and Understanding are the two main tenets of Christianity others (on extremist Christian web sites) put this idea down as naivety.

So I still need to pusjh on with this thread, really.

 

[oldbadger]

In my theological training, I never heard of a "clobber passage".

What do you mean?

Theological training?
Excellent!
If the focus of your theology was Christianity, how much emphasis if any was focused upon laws from the OT, and if so, which ones, please?

 

[oldbadger]

His last statement says it all...the whole of the Law was based on these two, so theoretically it was not possible to break one of those two without breaking any of the others. The principles still apply because the spirit of the law never went away.

Hello again. I had to quote just this one paragraph so that it is on view.

This 'spirit of the law' never going away.

If the World was populated by so many JWs that the Watchtower governed the World, would certain crimes be punished by whipping or flogging as in Deut. 25:2?

Would Widows be able to receive loans pledge-free as in Deut. 24:17

These were selected at random, OK?